From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jun 7 19:31:31 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA21698 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 19:31:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA21617; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 19:31:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.7.5/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id LAA15033; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:30:20 +0900 (JST) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:30:20 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock To: Nate Williams cc: Terry Lambert , hackers@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The -stable problem: my view In-Reply-To: <199606080221.UAA02108@rocky.sri.MT.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 7 Jun 1996, Nate Williams wrote: > > > > Terry proposes a set of tools to help enforce the policy of always having ^^^^^^ I said help not guarantee. The tools would help resolve reads while commits are being done. Multiple reader/single writer locks are a cheap effective way to do this. -mh > > a buildable tree. Would this make the commit process too cumbersome? > > Because these tools are unattainable. Saying 'it would be nice if we > could guarantee that the tree was always buildable' is like saying 'it > would be nice if everyone liked everyone'. It's a wonderful goal, but > it's unattainable given the current resources. > > > Nate > -- michaelh@cet.co.jp http://www.cet.co.jp CET Inc., Daiichi Kasuya BLDG 8F 2-5-12, Higashi Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105 Japan Tel: +81-3-3437-1761 Fax: +81-3-3437-1766